The Philadelphia Experiment

Let's get this right the first time. The proponents of the Philadelphia Experiment were wacko UFOnauts. Jacques Vallee proved it was a hoax. And it was Morris K. Jessup, the "intrepid" UFO investigator who believed Carlos Allende's wonderful fabrications about a Navy Destroyer disappearing from one port and reappearing at another!

Now, you may ask, why do I bring this up? Only to say that the story has become further distorted by people like the man who claims to have assumed the personality of a crew member and traveled back and forth in time!

How about getting the "facts" in order. The experiment supposedly involved some sort of movement of the ship through the fourth dimension, which was construed to be an extra spatial dimension, not time.

What's worse is that this phony who claims to have been inside the body of a crew member, invented his own story called the "Montauk Project." It seems that one hoax is re-fashioned into another.

But what is it about the Philadelphia Experiment that is so appealing to the masses?

First, its secretiveness. It was supposed to be on the same level as the Manhattan Project. And, doesn't it always feel good to know a "secret" about something "really important"?

Second, that it is a military secret. Oh, what power and intrigue. I can't remember the person who said this, but here it is: "Military secrets are the most fleeting of all." Not much of a secret after all!

Third, a whole new form of "space travel" is opened up. Mason Valentine, a close friend of Jessup's, claimed that we would soon go to the "farthest" stars with a "phase change" of matter, inorganic and vital, through an "interdimensional gateway."

Finally, that humans would make contact with ETs as a consequence of the "trans-dimensional" experiments.

Next, we need to know who the "players" were in devising the Philadelphia Experiment. William L. Moore, along with UFOlogist and linguist Charles Berlitz, authored the popular paperback, "The Philadelphia Experiment." Moore has since said the book was not factual. I'm sure Berlitz would say otherwise.

But not all of the "players" that Moore and Berlitz mention are fictitious characters. Look who they include:

Anyone who has read the book also knows that Albert Einstein is mentioned as having had his unified field theory demonstated on the U.S.S. Eldrige, the
ship in the experiment.

As is well known in conspiracy theories like the J.F.K. assasination, to one real person, Lee Harvey Oswald, is added at least one more character, a shadowy figure on the grassy knoll ahead of the presidential entourage.

My point is simple. The Philadelphia Experiment mixed real people with fictitious characters. An example from science fiction will illustrate this technique.

In an episode of Star Trek: The Next Generation, the familiar fictional characters appear: Geordi, the chief engineer, and Data, the robot. Among the other personages playing poker are Issac Newton, Albert Einstein and Steven Hawking (he played himself).

Now the three scientists above are not fictitious characters. The dialog of Newton and Einstein was a complete fabrication. Hawking's comments were relevant because he addressed the theories of the two other men.

The thing that catches the attention of people the most about the Philadelphia Experiment is the ship disappearing from one port and reappearing at another. But, Berlitz said this was an accident.

What were the initial objectives of the PE? Unbelievably, radar stealth and optical invisibility! Now we know that stealth didn't come into its own until well after WWII.

Now, Ivan Seeking mentioned the degaussing coils around the ship. These were used on many ships to avoid magnetic mines. Initially, the coils were wrapped externally around a ship. Later, the coils were built into the hull.

What about the degaussing coils beyond degaussing? The authors claim that the coils were fed with a current to create a huge magnetic field on and around the ship. This "field" supposedly changed the index of refraction of the steel hull to allow radar signals to be absorbed and not reflected back to enemy radar. In 1943? Without composite materials? Not likely.

The far greater claim was optical invisibility. This was supposed to allow the destroyer to "sneak up" on unsuspecting enemy ships. Trouble was, the enemy didn't have to see the ship coming, they could hear its engines a mile away!